How can anybody justify voting for someone (Hillary) who...?
50 2016-02-11 by 911bodysnatchers322
(Credit to /u/MellowArtichoke) -- formatting and venue makes all the difference (-11 karms on /r/politics)
Right, how can anybody justify voting for someone who:
- Takes millions in speaking fees from Wall Street while pretending to speak for the little people
- Says she doesn't know what Bernie Sanders means by "the establishment", says she's not a part of it
- Transmitted classified intelligence over unsecured channels...
- ... then joked during a press conference about wiping her server clean "with a cloth or something"
- ... and laughs off everything she doesn't want to talk about in general
- ... including when she was asked by a reporter whether she would release the transcript from her paid speeches at Goldman Sachs
- Offered a Vermont newspapers off the record anti-Sanders tips
- Lies about her opponent's health care program
- Is said, by an ex Wall Street trader with 20 years of experience, to have turned the Democratic Party "from a party against Wall Street to a party of Wall Street"
- Sends her daughter to lie about her opponent's health care program
- ... and to speak to NYC fundraisers hosted by Wall Street bankers, where attendees can "pay $2700 for a picture" with her
- Has a son-in-law who is an ex Goldman Sachs investment banker and hedgefund co-founder
- Voted for the invasion of Iraq
- Voted for the PATRIOT Act
- Voted for the 2006 renewal of the PATRIOT Act
- Questions her older opponent's health while she was hospitalized for a concussion and a blood clot 3 years ago
- Voted for the 2001 Bankruptcy Legislation which would have made it harder for struggling Americans to declare bankruptcy, after expressing her opposition to the bill when she was First Lady
- Believed that marriage was defined as between a man and woman and reversed her position only when it became politically convenient
- Received millions in shady donations for her foundation while she was Secretary of State...
- ... the same foundation whose donors got weapons deals when she was Secretary of State
- Makes her fans wait hours for a five-minute speech...
- ... while she gives closed doors fundraisers for rich donors
- Is the first presidential candidate in History to be under investigation by the FBI during a campaign
- Pretends to speak for the black community when she campaigned for Barry Goldwater back in the '60s, who was fighting against civil rights
- Led a legislative campaign against video games in 2005, by pushing for the Family Entertainment Protection Act, which would have criminalized the sale of games rated "Mature" or "Adults Only" to minors, arguing that "violent video games are stealing the innocence of our children"
- Doesn't support clemency for Edward Snowden
- Wants a "Manhattan Project" to break encryption and force tech companies to plant backdoors in their products
- Praised the repeal of Glass-Steagall
- Supported the TPP
- calling it the "gold standard in trade agreements". Opposes a carbon tax
- Took donations from federally registered lobbyists or PACs for private prison companies until October 2015
- Originally supported the Keystone pipeline, and now says "no comment" Clinton Slams Sanders' Free College Idea By Invoking Donald Trump's Kids
- On Marijuana, Hillary Clinton Sides with Big Pharma and gets more money from them than any other candidate
- and despite naming the pharmaceutical industry as one of her greatest "enemies", has received more money from drug companies than any other candidate 2 3 4 No Reporters Allowed At Hillary’s Wall Street Speeches
- Hillary reverses Single-Payer position after getting $13 Million from Health Industry, now she says it will "never, ever come to pass"
- On Walmart's board of directors (1986-1992)
14 comments
15 -TruthHurts- 2016-02-11
I highly doubt anyone who seriously ventures into conspiracy with any type of open mind will be voting for Shillary
3 kingcubfan 2016-02-11
Justified to only those who will benefit from her being elected. Won't be her though. If a big attack happens on the US it will bring in Trump. If no attack, Sanders will win. IMO
3 wanktown 2016-02-11
“Voting, the be all and end all of modern democratic politicians, has become a farce, if indeed it was ever anything else. By voting, the people decide only which of the oligarchs preselected for them as viable candidates will wield the whip used to flog them and will command the legion of willing accomplices and anointed lickspittles who perpetrate the countless violations of the people’s natural rights. Meanwhile, the masters soothe the masses by assuring them night and day that they — the plundered and bullied multitudes who compose the electorate — are themselves the government.” ― Robert Higgs
0 yoyoman2 2016-02-11
My god are you sexist? I didn't even read the post but I know you are being sexist
1stFemalePOTUS
-3 Gaijinfag 2016-02-11
Great post OP, have mine on Sanders.
He's grossly ignorant of economics. He has constantly flubbed the most basic facts; one that comes to mind instantly is his ignorance of the reasons why student loans differ from car loans or mortgages
Source
He complains about money in politics, yet he lines up to accept money from both corrupt unions and anti-labor corporations, and he does favors for sugar industry lobbyists and defense contractors.
Source 1 Source 2 Source 3
He claims to be a real civil rights leader and a fighter for the poor and downtrodden, but then he'll turn around and try to use poor ethnic communities as dumping grounds for his state's nuclear waste.
Source
He's a huge warmonger. He tries to disguise this by playing dumb about foreign policy and deflecting to climate change and his irrelevant economic stump speech whenever he's asked about it, as he knows the truth would alienate his "progressive" base, but his history is one of consistent cow-towing to the war lobby:
Source
Source
He promises all the "glorious" free handout programs of Europe, yet neglects to mention the extremely regressive taxes, the key differences in culture and population size, and the fact that none of those countries actually fund their militaries because they rely on us to fight for them (freeing up money to go towards their welfare states instead). He also leaves out the part where nationalist parties and conservative welfare reform parties are becoming more and more popular in Europe because they're finally realizing that socialism doesn't work in the long run. Even scarier than his deranged views are the Modern Monetary Theory kooks he surrounds himself with.
Source
He has deranged ideas in general. For example: He wants to bring back illegals who were deported.
Source
10 sudo-tleilaxu 2016-02-11
Interesting post Corporatist Trump shill 4-month old account. Did you give yourself gold with one of your upvoting sockpuppets, or just gift yourself with the one you are using now?
I think you need to maybe get off the computer and go shave that neckbeard off at least one of those chins and get outside.
-8 Gaijinfag 2016-02-11
Not an argument.
My points are well sourced - while you neglected to even attempt to refute them and jumped to personal attacks against me.
10 sudo-tleilaxu 2016-02-11
Exactly.
My "attacks" are well sourced too, from your own post history.
A shill is as a shill does.
2 jarxlots 2016-02-11
"Mah mah always said, A shill is as a shill does."
Couldn't help myself.
4 errydaymofo 2016-02-11
I'm an economics major and I agree with Sanders, it makes little sense at all. Where is your argument?
0 Ihopeitsround 2016-02-11
This is the most well put together critique of Bernie Sanders I've seen; thank you. I am all too aware of his "wolf in sheep's clothing" disposition but I don't really know how to verbalize it because he really is superb at hoding it. This helps. The whole thing about Europe's depending on us for military protection is SO blatant. Thank you. I hope he doesn't win, but then again, I hope no one wins. Sadly, I feel like he will.
3 brownestrabbit 2016-02-11
Hate to break it to you but someone will be crowned by the end of this shit show.
-1 kingcubfan 2016-02-11
And how. Well said! I'm on your team. I'm thinking Trump if there is an "attack" on the US and Sanders if not. The campaign reminds me a lot of Obamas first one in regards to how people are responding.
-6 Surroundedbyidiots12 2016-02-11
Game. Set. Match.
Tremendous post.
1 911bodysnatchers322 2016-02-11
Agreed. We are interested in Truth here. Politics can go to /r/politics.
10 911bodysnatchers322 2016-02-11
1) I have to say that you use this quote to discredit Sanders, but I think you've made the opposite point. I'm with Sanders on this.
2) Among that short list, all those monetary contributions are under 15,000. Hillary made several millions speaking at one engagement. Again, you're not making your point of corruption here. Politicians do need to accept some money to run for reelection and it looks like Bernie took a very humble amount...like bare minimum. Which means he's a very desirable candidate to go so far on so little. Again, gaijinfag, you've undermined your message. You can keep the gold though for research.
3) This point is a reprise of the last point, which is a weak nonpoint. Sanders took either 15k, 19k or 20k from the sugar industry according to this article. I've probably given the sugar industry that amount of money in my whole lifetime with all my soda drinking in my 20s. So I cancel it out. Isn't that how it works? lol. no. But my point is that's not a lot of money. You're trying to pull the sugar of corruption out of the beets of nonsense.
4) The nuclear dumping article is real interesting because you're making a mountain out of a nothing hill. In fact, I've been near to Sierra Blanca in Hudspeth, Texas looking to buy land there. It was like the surface of mars, desolate, dry arid nothing land. It made everything in my soul cry out in agoraphobic fear unlike anything I've experienced except perhaps eastern Montana which is equivalently terrifying. The terror comes from the fact that if your car breaks down, you're very likely to die. This is what a desert is, there's nothing there, no one around to help you, no one would be caught (not) dead there, and theres no water whatsoever.
Your point is: After hearing both sides of the arguments, Sanders, considering the scientific data and reportage from both sides (he heard the activists points), is some kind of ecological racist because made the 'obstinate' decision to put nuclear waste in the most desolate, non-occupiable-for-human-life area in the united states. WOW Good point Gaijinfag He's a rascal all right.
5) You have a strong point with #5 about war
and
Yep, he's a goddamned shiester for that.
6) Without reading your source I can say that whatever arguments you make about paying for social services I have already been convinced are totally invalid and wastes of time quibbling over details that aren't even relevant. The red flag was the 'ignores differences of scale of population'. Problem is that math scales, so that argument that perennially pops up is prima facie a canard. It's not like we're talking about wifi attenuation! Its infrastructure and we know how to do it, we've had lots of practice.
7) Im with Sanders on bringing back immigrants whose children were abandoned here. That policy to deport them was evil to begin with. Either the whole family gets uprooted or they don't. Halfway breaks the family, which then fucks up the immigrant childrens life (and they are in fact, completely blameless in that btw). If we claim to care about children so much, why are our policies fucking up their lives? No. Again your number 7 undermines your claim that Sanders is a bad candidate.
It shows he's got scruples unlike the others he's competing with.
Overall gaijinfag, you've made one really strong point and I reject the others. It's that Sanders is NOT being honest about his war record, and that he's a shitty asshole of a hawk as well. So anyone thinking he wouldn't start or continue wars is being misled.
Thanks for the game.
-6 Surroundedbyidiots12 2016-02-11
Game. Set. Match.
Tremendous post.
-1 kingcubfan 2016-02-11
And how. Well said! I'm on your team. I'm thinking Trump if there is an "attack" on the US and Sanders if not. The campaign reminds me a lot of Obamas first one in regards to how people are responding.
10 911bodysnatchers322 2016-02-11
1) I have to say that you use this quote to discredit Sanders, but I think you've made the opposite point. I'm with Sanders on this.
2) Among that short list, all those monetary contributions are under 15,000. Hillary made several millions speaking at one engagement. Again, you're not making your point of corruption here. Politicians do need to accept some money to run for reelection and it looks like Bernie took a very humble amount...like bare minimum. Which means he's a very desirable candidate to go so far on so little. Again, gaijinfag, you've undermined your message. You can keep the gold though for research.
3) This point is a reprise of the last point, which is a weak nonpoint. Sanders took either 15k, 19k or 20k from the sugar industry according to this article. I've probably given the sugar industry that amount of money in my whole lifetime with all my soda drinking in my 20s. So I cancel it out. Isn't that how it works? lol. no. But my point is that's not a lot of money. You're trying to pull the sugar of corruption out of the beets of nonsense.
4) The nuclear dumping article is real interesting because you're making a mountain out of a nothing hill. In fact, I've been near to Sierra Blanca in Hudspeth, Texas looking to buy land there. It was like the surface of mars, desolate, dry arid nothing land. It made everything in my soul cry out in agoraphobic fear unlike anything I've experienced except perhaps eastern Montana which is equivalently terrifying. The terror comes from the fact that if your car breaks down, you're very likely to die. This is what a desert is, there's nothing there, no one around to help you, no one would be caught (not) dead there, and theres no water whatsoever.
Your point is: After hearing both sides of the arguments, Sanders, considering the scientific data and reportage from both sides (he heard the activists points), is some kind of ecological racist because made the 'obstinate' decision to put nuclear waste in the most desolate, non-occupiable-for-human-life area in the united states. WOW Good point Gaijinfag He's a rascal all right.
5) You have a strong point with #5 about war
and
Yep, he's a goddamned shiester for that.
6) Without reading your source I can say that whatever arguments you make about paying for social services I have already been convinced are totally invalid and wastes of time quibbling over details that aren't even relevant. The red flag was the 'ignores differences of scale of population'. Problem is that math scales, so that argument that perennially pops up is prima facie a canard. It's not like we're talking about wifi attenuation! Its infrastructure and we know how to do it, we've had lots of practice.
7) Im with Sanders on bringing back immigrants whose children were abandoned here. That policy to deport them was evil to begin with. Either the whole family gets uprooted or they don't. Halfway breaks the family, which then fucks up the immigrant childrens life (and they are in fact, completely blameless in that btw). If we claim to care about children so much, why are our policies fucking up their lives? No. Again your number 7 undermines your claim that Sanders is a bad candidate.
It shows he's got scruples unlike the others he's competing with.
Overall gaijinfag, you've made one really strong point and I reject the others. It's that Sanders is NOT being honest about his war record, and that he's a shitty asshole of a hawk as well. So anyone thinking he wouldn't start or continue wars is being misled.
Thanks for the game.
10 sudo-tleilaxu 2016-02-11
Interesting post Corporatist Trump shill 4-month old account. Did you give yourself gold with one of your upvoting sockpuppets, or just gift yourself with the one you are using now?
I think you need to maybe get off the computer and go shave that neckbeard off at least one of those chins and get outside.
0 Ihopeitsround 2016-02-11
This is the most well put together critique of Bernie Sanders I've seen; thank you. I am all too aware of his "wolf in sheep's clothing" disposition but I don't really know how to verbalize it because he really is superb at hoding it. This helps. The whole thing about Europe's depending on us for military protection is SO blatant. Thank you. I hope he doesn't win, but then again, I hope no one wins. Sadly, I feel like he will.
4 errydaymofo 2016-02-11
I'm an economics major and I agree with Sanders, it makes little sense at all. Where is your argument?